Lyndon Nerenberg wrote on 04/19/2016 05:24:
On 2016-04-18 8:17 PM, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Can someone on the "too many packages" campaign here explain to me how
having too fine a granularity stops you from making macro packages
containing packages?
Because honestly I can't see how having granularity hurts at all when if
someone wanted to make it less granular all they would have to do is
make some meta-packages.
Meta-packages doesn't hide anything (in list of packages and problems
with dependencies)
It's the *I have to put it back together* part that's annoying. I
didn't break something that has worked, forever. It shouldn't be
incumbent on me to un-break someone else's work.
+1
And you made another good point in previous e-mail about reviewed
research. I would really like to see some docs about this topic. I have
a feeling that some work on FreeBSD is against average users / admins
and is good only for vedors of specialized or embedded devices.
As many before - I am not against packaging base. It is good, but 10 -
20 packages will be enough. 800+ is too far from my feeling of "this is
good feature".
This seems like a nightmare to me. This was one of the reasons I don't
like other OS distribuitions and I stayed with FreeBSD for more than 15
years.
Miroslav Lachman
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
